The Importance of Language

Part 1: Communicating Without Language
     Communicating without any spoken language was thoroughly difficult. This was largely due to the fact that my partner could not really understand any of my answers, especially when it came to more complex responses. What ended up happening was them essentially guessing multiple times what I was trying to say until I gave them a sign of approval like a nod or a thumbs up. While I ended up getting frustrated, my partner was thoroughly ammused. As time went on, the conversation ultimately started turning into more yes or no questions. Some of the more complex answers took upwards of five minutes for my partner to interpret.
     Throughout the conversation my partner was primarily in control as it was even more difficult to ask questions than to answer them. Most of the questions I would be able to ask were along the lines of, "and you?" after they asked me how my day was and I responded. So during the time my partner was the only one really able to ask questions and change topics. The power was definitely tipped in their favor as they dictated the conversation as I was really only able to respond. Not being able to change topics or ask questions definitely made me feel more submisive. It was very hard to supress the urge to speak as I got thoroughly frustrated.
     If this conversation represented two different cultures, my partners culture is far more advanced and is far more better suited to communicate more complex language. From this we could infer that their culture and society is far more advanced than mine as they can communicate more complex ideas that help them advance. They would most likely view my culture as very primitive and undevloped. To them it would essentially be like talking to a dog; a lot of what they understand would come from reading my body language and ultimately determine if I am happy or frustrated as a substitute for yes or no. A modern situation that best fits this example can be seen if we were to interact with amazon tribes that have stayed very secluded from the modern world and still live very primitive lives. These tribes have often developed their own dialect, but not understanding even the local language would make communicating even more difficult. Another example would be seen if two monolingual people from two differnt cultures were to interact. They would both view the other person as essentially underdeveloped and the power of the conversation would probably be more balanced as they both can use spoken language.

Part 2: Communicating Without Physical Embellishments
     This conversation was much easier and a lot more productive. My partner had no problem understanding me and I was better able to answer and ask questions. This time the power was better distributed evenly. However, after a while the conversation seemed more dull and topics changed more frequently. So while they had no difficulty understanding me, I believe they had more difficulty wanting to continue talking to me.
     What this conversation showed me is that physical language helps portray emotion which is just as important as spoken language when communicating effectively. Body language helps people determine our emotions when communicating such as whether or not we are happy, angry, sad, or uncomfortable. It also helps us determine if people actually want to talk to you. Therefore it is very hard to communicate effectively without using any physical language. Without emotion it's as if the words carry no meaning. It also wears out the conversation and makes it boring. It's like talking to a monotone person which makes it really confusing whether or not they want to talk to you.
     Being able to read body language is very important when it comes to survial. When interacting with a potentially hostile person you can judge when they are going to attack or when it is best to leave before they attack. You can tell when someone is mad at you or if they want to hurt you. You can tell when people are nervous as they sweat and seem uneasy. When obtaining resources epecially from other people you can tell whether or not they want to give you resources or take your resources or whether or not they feel uneasy about sharing resources. When hunting animals you can tell when the prey is relxed or caught of guard or when they are skittish, helping decide the right moment to act. When trying to reproduce it helps males determine if their advances are working and if females want to reproduce or tell them when to make the right move. Birds often obtain mates through using body language and by doing what can be interpretted as mating dances.
     Often times people who have difficulty reading body language are people who have trouble communicating in general, which can be seen in people with autism. People with autism can have trouble communicating verbally or even just have problems socially by not being able to read body language and essentially understanding the "mood" of the conversation. However, this is not just a problem people with autism face, sometimes people really just don't know how to read body language or misinterpret it. In my experience some people don't see when peoples body language indicate that they are uncomfortable or don't want to talk. The only time that I could see where reading body language is unbeneficial is when someone is trying to decieve you for what ever reason by essentially using false body language. However, often times it's difficult to know when someone is trying to decieve you.

The Piltdown Hoax

The Piltdown Man was initially dicovered in 1912 after amateur archaeologist, Charles Dawson, discovered a piece of its skull in a gravel pit located in Piltdown, England. The fossil remains of the Piltdown Man were, at the time, believed to be one of the oldest fossilized evidence of early humans. Upon his initial discovery of the skull fragment, Dawson invited Englands leading geologist, Aurthur Smith Woodward from Englands Natural History Museum to join him in excavating the fossils. It had been believed that they had discovered the missing link between apes and humans. Woodwards credibility helped validate the discovery as the scientific community cheered and applauded the discovery. This also helped validate Aurthur Keith's, England's leading anatomist, theory that big brains developed long before bipedal walking. However, during the 1920's scientist began finding ancient remains elsewhere throughout the world. The ressults sparked speculation about the authenticity of the piltdown man as the skulls of these more recent ancestors appeared to be less human rather than more human. It wouldnt be until 1949 that scientists could uncover the truth. In 1949 scientist conducted a fluorine test to determine the age of the fossils and found that they were rather recent. In 1953, a full scale investigation into the remains found at Piltdown took place. Scientist had found that the fossils and tools had been stained and tampered with to make them appear human. One of the most shocking finds was that the mandible had belonged to a female orangutan, was only about a hundred years old, and the teeth had been filed down to look more human. While no one is certain who tampered with the fossils, many skeptics believe that Dawson had done it to feed his own ambition and elevate himself in the scientific community and join the Royal Society.
     In this case, ambition seem to be at fault. Ambition is what most likely drove Dawson to create the hoax as such a monumental find would elevate his carrer to heights he had dreamed of. Ambition is what drove Arthur Keith to blindly accept Dawson's findings as he only wanted to validate his own theory. Ambition is what drives many scientists. However, while Dawson's ambition helped him for the time being, it only hurt the scientific community as the Piltdown man would become the basis for research on human evolution for the next few decades. Errors like these hinder the scientific process as it essentially bring singnificant research to a hault until someone figures out that it's wrong.
     It took time for scientist to figure out the hoax, but when the time came they used fluoride dating to figure out that the skull was a lot younger than they had initially thought. In 1953, when a full investigation was launched, a more accurate form of dating was used to determine that the mandible was only a mere hundred years old. Microscopic analysis showed that the teeth hand been mechanically filed down to appear human. Further analysis showed that not only had the fossils been stained, and the mandible had been broken apart to fit the skull and hide the fact that it belonged to an ape.
     With advancements in science and technology, an error of this magnitude is unlikely, however while it is most likely not possible to remove the "human" from science as we are the ones who's ambition and curiosity drives scinetific research. Without a human touch there would be no one to speculate and research the validity of scientific discoveries in order to give us the most accurate information. Therefore, the human touch shouldnt be removed because whitout it, great discoveries and inventions wouldn't exist.
     The Piltdown Hoax taught me to essentially to take certain information with a grain of sault. By that I mean that you shouldn't always believe information without questioning it's validity yourself. As scientist, it's important that you understand the information given to you as well as the information that surrounds it. In certain cases, it's best that you investigate such information to determine it's validity. As human's we must remember that everyone is capable of mistakes whether they are intentional or accidental. When it come to science I believe it's important to be able to take and consider criticism and well as give it. Otherwise, we may never discover the errors that could possibly shape our way of thinking.